Unbalanced (no defense coverage at all)

To my knowledge Adolf Eichmann was given a fair trial(aka he was allowed to have a legal defense), but in this film there was no coverage of his defense team at all, actually they did not even show his lawyer(s). They skipped the defense parts in such a clumsy way that it felt like they edited them out; why cover the cross-examination of the accused by the attorney general but not the original defense examination?

I realize their budget was limited, but I think they should have added ~20 minutes to cover the defense part of the trial. Showing only the prosecuting part and accusing only witness testimonies does not have a "fair trial" ring. I know that there is no way Eichmann could (or should) be found not guilty, but presenting only the accusations - prosecution side of a trial made the coverage of the trial seem like a farce of justice.

Even Eichmann is innocent until proven guilty, according to international criminal law, so if the producers of the film tried and found him guilty before even the trial began then why make a film about the trial at all? Did they producers fear that if they covered the defense part of the trial they risked being accused of taking a neutral point of view on a matter of such grave importance?

Fanboy : a person who does not think while watching.